New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-01-19
THE INDIANA CASE.

1t is important, in view OF the contest
which can now be forcseen, to understand the
steps of the Indiana case as they develop. Inc
decision of partisan court, cnJoining Lieu
.e,nant-Goyernor from performing the dutcs
of that office. after he has been duly sworn IN
and recognized by one branch OF the LcglSat-
ure. is the more surprising because it directly
conflicts with a previous decision Of the same
court, in cffcct, that it had no jurisdiction IN
the matter. 1t must he held, therefore. thai
the Licutenant-Govemor rightly proposes 10
treat the earlier decision as valid, and the
later decision as Of no force, for II the courts
mad no jurisdiction, as it formerly decided anu
as the Lieutenant Governor maintains. no IN
junction or other action by that court could IN
any way deprive the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF
his rights or relieve him from his responsible
,tics as State officer
But tho case on his side is still stronger
because it has been considered and decided
by the source of all power, the people OF the
State. The question whether there was
vacancy in tho Office of Lieutenant-Governor
was raised before the election and judicial
opinion was obtained at the instance OF Mr..
Smith, who now usurps the place of presiding
officer of tho Senate. 1t was then held. with
full assent of both Iartics, that the law re-
ouired an election of ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
and accordingly both parties nominated can
didatcs for that Office. The votes OF the
people of both parties were cast Tor the can
didatcs so nominated. The people then de-
clarcd, i'm the manner required 10y the law,
that they, the only source of power In rcpuD-
Ican form of government, held that vacancy
did exist and that ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
should he elected to fill that vacancy. The
entire vote of both parties went to affirm these
positions, and the majority of votes then cast
elected Lieutenant-GOvcrnor Robertson, VINO
has been duly qualified. 1t is most eXtraor-
binary thing that court should now under
take to set aside, not only its own previous de-
ci,ion but the decision Of the people OF the
State 1t is notorious that no man o. either
patty would have questioned the validity OF
the election, had not the choice of Senator
possibly depended upon the casting vote of the
Lieutenant Governor Action so grossly partl-
san in character can command no respect
1t is to lie noted also, that the beginning OF
illegal and revolutionary action in the unscat-
ing of members duly elected has been made by
the Democratic Senate. Either house has the
power W ucCluc do W tHC I"uih''N
tons of its members. But it is the right and
duty of the public 10 determine whether that
power is exercised honestly, and in obedience
to law or in a lawlcss and revolutionary man
ncr. The test is to be found in the manner oil
decision the Senate has turned out Senator
upon evidence submitted by one party only
refusing to hear evidence on the other side, or
to allow time for its presentation. No reason
ing man will deny that partisan vote under
such circumstances is an abuse Of power. illegal
and revolutionary in its nature. The House
had duly considered evidence for and against
one Of the members returned, and had decided
after full hearing Of evidence on both sides,
that the person returned was disqualified by
law. In that opinion many prominent Demo-
Gratis concurrcd. But in retaliation, and in
order 10 secure, with or without law, COM
pcnsating vote for United States Senator, the
Senate turns out a member. refusing to hear
any evidence except that offered by his Oppo-
nents. Tho distinction will. be fatal to the
Democrats when the question comes TO be con-
sdcrcd by the United States Senate.